HOME | WORKS | TEXT

 

MIROSLAV PAVLOVIC / DIMENSIONAL WORKS / 1979 - 2000

C.V. & TEXT

Gallery Sct. Agnes - Roskilde, Denmark, 1983

Miroslav Pavlovic - Biografija
Miroslav Pavlovic je rodjen u Vrscu 1952. godine. Studirao na Institutu za likovne umetnosti "Nikolae Grigoresku" u Bukurestu (Rumunija) 1974-78. u klasi profesora Konstantina Blende. Postdiplomske studije zavrsio na istoj akademiji 1980. godine. Imao je vise samostalnih izlozbi pocev od 1978. godine u Rumuniji, Jugoslaviji, Skandinaviji i SAD. Ucestvovao je na brojnim kolektivnim izlozbama u zemlji i inostranstvu. Radovi mu se nalaze u kolekcijama u Rumuniji, Jugoslaviji, Danskoj, Svedskoj, Norveskoj, Sjedinjenim Drzavama, Japanu...

Miroslav Pavlovic - Curriculum Vitae
Miroslav Pavlovic was born in Vrsac, Yugoslavia, 1952. He graduated from the Institute of Fine Arts "Nicolae Grigorescu" in Bucharest (Romania) 1974-78. in the class of Prof. Constantin Blendea. Post-graduated studies at the same academy he had finished 1980. He had many personal exhibitions since 1978 in Romania, Yugoslavia, Scandinavia and USA. He took part at many collective exhibitions in Yugoslavia and abroad. His works are making part of vast number of collections in Romania, Yugoslavia, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, United States, Japan...

Miroslav Pavlovic - Lebenslauf
Miroslav Pavlovic wurde 1952 in Vrsac geboren. Von 1974 bis 1978 studierter am Institut für bildende Kunst Nicolae Grigorescu in Bukarest (Rumänien) in der Klasse des Professors Constantin Blendea. Das Magisterstudium schloss er 1980 an derselben Akademie ab.Seit 1978 hatte er mehrere selbstständige Ausstellungen in Rumänien, Jugoslawien, Skandinavien und den USA. Er nahm an zahlreichen kollektiven Ausstellungen im In- und Ausland teil. Seine Arbeiten findet man in den Kollektionen in Rumänien, Jugoslawien, Dänemark, Schweden, Norwegen, Japan, in den USA ...

Miroslav Pavlovitch - Biographie
Miroslav Pavlovitch est ne a Vrsac en 1952. Il a termine l'Institut des beaux arts "Nicolae Grigorescu"a Bucarest (Roumanie) en 1974-78, dans la classe du professeur Constantin Blendea. Les études postuniversitaire il les a aussi termine a la même académie en 1980.Il a en plusieurs expositions indépendantes a partir du 1978. en Roumanie, Yougoslavie, Scandinavie et les Etats Unis. Il a participa a des nombreuses expositions collectives dans le pays et a l'étranger. Ses travaux se trouvant dans des collections en Roumanie, Yougoslavie, Danemark, Norvege, Etats Unis au Japon
...

Address: Skadarska 28, 26300 Vrsac / Serbia, EU / tel: ++381.64.512.8465 /


SELECTED EXHIBITIONS:
Personal:
Center for Cultural Exchange with Foreign Countries - Dimensional Works, Bucharest, Romania, 1980
Gallery Sct. Agnes - Dimensional Works, Roskilde, Denmark, 1983
Center for Contemporary Culture, Concordia - Symmetry and Space, Vrsac, Yugoslavia, 1997
Golden Eye, Center for Visual Culture - Dimensional Works and Works of Paper, Novi Sad, Yugoslavia, 1998
Center for Cultural Decontamination - Dimensional Works and Works of Paper, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 1998
Museum of Contemporary Arts, Salon - Symmetry and Space, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 2000
Gallery '73 - Dimensional Works, New Works, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 2001 .
Center for Contemporary Culture, Concordia - Definitions, Vrsac, Yugoslavia, 2001 /
Top Ten exhibitions of 2001, NIN/
Center for Cultural Decontamination - Communiqué, Belgrade, Yugoslavia, 2001

Center for Contemporary Culture, Concordia - Issue of the Painting, Vrsac, Serbia, 2003

Off the Map Gallery - Toronto, Canada - New.Works, 2005 and  Messages, 2006

SKC Gallery -."streamproof".- Belgrade, Serbia, 2007

Galerie 2META – personally - Bucharest, Romania 2007

SKC Gallery dimensional.works.2008.- Belgrade, Serbia, 2008

SULUV Gallery, New.Works,.2008 Novi Sad, Serbia, 2008

 

Group:
House of Culture "Grigore Preoteasa" - Young Artists from Yugoslavia, Bucharest, Romania, 1978
Dalles Hall - Annual Exhibition of Art in Romania, Bucharest, Romania, 1980
SKC, Art Workshop - Young Artists/Belgrade-Düsseldorf, Class of Klaus Rinke in SKC, Belgrade/Yugoslavia, 1980
Gallery "Gammelgard" - Six Sculptors and One Painter ( Ib Braun, Pipin Henderson, Steffan Herrik, Anton Linnet,
Anders Tinsbo, Yan and Miroslav Pavlovic ), Herlev, Denmark, 1986
Gallery Hansen - Artists from Chicago, Chicago, United States, 1987
Center for Contemporary Culture, Concordia - Fourteen Artists from Vrsac, Vrsac, Yugoslavia, 1999
Art of Nineties in Voivodina - Resistance and Confrontations , Novi Sad and Pancevo, Yugoslavia, 2001

French Cultural Center - Art in Vrsac, Belgrade, Serbia, 2002

A Space Gallery - Construction/Deconstruction, Toronto, Canada, 2004

Cultural Center of S&MN - Factory & Sculpture, Paris, France, 2004

Museum of Contemporary Arts - 10 Years of Concordia, Vrsac, Belgrade, Serbia, 2004

Observatoire.4.Gallery - Destruction/Deconstruction/Construction, Montreal, Canada, 2004

Manual 05 - Aspects of Contemporary Sculpture in Voivodina , Novi Sad, Serbia , 2005

Gallery "Beograd" - The Historical and the Modern, Belgrade, Serbia, 2006

Italian.Cultural.Centre - In the Meantime, Szeged, Hungary, 2006

Museum of Contemporary Art Voivodina, Art in Voivodina, end of century, Stepanov Collection, Aug.- Sep. 2007, N.S., Serbia

 

revieWEd by:

Roul Shorban, Professor of Contemporary Arts at the Institute of Fine Arts - Nicolae Grigorescu, Bucharest, Romania

Magda Carneci, Curator at the National Museum in Bucharest, Romania

Teddy Brunius, Rector at the University of Uppsala, Sweden, and Professor at the University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Virtus Schade, Columnist of daily paper Berlingske Tidende,  art critic and publicist, Copenhagen, Denmark

Peter Schjeldahl, Columnist and art critic of The New Yorker, New York, United States

Jerko Denegri, Professor of Contemporary Arts at the University of Belgrade, Serbia

Jovan Despotovic, Curator at the Museum of Contemporary Arts, Belgrade, Serbia

Djordje Kadijevic, Professor at the University of Belgrade and columnist of NIN Magazine, Belgrade, Serbia

Sava Stepanov, Publicist and art critic, Director of the Golden Eye Gallery, Novi Sad, Serbia

Gary Michael Dault, Columnist and art critic of daily paper Globe And Mail, Toronto, Canada

Whitney May, Editorial and columnist of New York Arts Magazine, New York, United States

Slobodan Boda Ristic, Publicist, art critic and editor of Third Program - Radio Belgrade, Serbia

Ljiljana Cinkul, Columnist and art critic of daily paper Politika, Belgrade, Serbia

Stevan.Vukovic,  Art Critic, Curator at SKC Gallery, Belgrade, Serbia


Museum of Contemporary Arts/Salon - Belgrade, 2000

COMMENTS.since.1980 

…accomplished, sophisticated artist. His abstract picture-constructions appear at once original and well grounded in a modern tradition.
Peter Schjeldahl, New York, 1987

...By it's nature Pavlovic`s work slips the instantaneousness; it aims at continuance, includes thourghly reconsidered mode of proceeding, his work requests concentrated, permanent action by reanalyzing his own achievements, and results so far.
Jerko Denegri, Belgrade, 1997

...Pavlovic showed us convincingly, judiciously and with grounding his fully defined concept of painting that is well founded in the now dominating aestheticism of the last traces of modernism, and even in the complex of artistic issues that are currently oriented toward the idea of a new or the second Modern at the end of this century and this grand artistic epoch. And whatever the ultimate answer is to the question of goals and meanings of Miroslav Pavlovic`s paintings, his work will undoubtedly be part of a contemporary art that has truly moved ahead artistic frontiers.
Jovan Despotovic, Belgrade, 1997

   The value of his work, then, lies in its reassessment of this tradition rather than in its destruction. All facets of the West’s most conventional art must be explored and, literally, expanded upon.

Whitney May, New York, 2006


...Za razumevanje Pavloviceve estetike od vaznosti je razlika izmedju likovnosti i slikovnosti. Kod Pavlovica je rec o “cistim” artefaktima u kojima nema ni traga klasicne slikovitosti. Svaki Pavlovicev eksponat je lik za sebe koji ne odslikava nista drugo. Tako shvacene ove Pavloviceve konstrukcije mogle bi da posluze kao primer tautoloske samodovoljnosti na kojoj se zasniva radna praksa aktivista ekstremne avangarde /.../ Njegovi radovi ne ukazuju samo na razliku izmedju likovnog i slikovitog, vec upozoravaju i na suprotnost artificijelnog i estetskog po kojoj se upravo koriguje aksiološki kriterijum sudjenja o tome sta jeste, a sta nije umetnicko delo...
Djordje Kadijevic, 2000
...U ovom opusu postoji jedno duhovno srodstvo i bliska svest sa idejama neoplasticizma (Mondrijan), konkretizma (Duisburg) i americkog minimalizma (Dzad, Levit, Andre). Sa prvim ga povezuje sklonost ka redu i harmoniji kao osnovnoj plastickoj ideji ali i kao “umetnickoj poruci”, sa drugim ubedjenje da je moguce ostvariti konkretnost linije, boje plohe, a sa trecim spremnost da se lapidarnim plastickim jezikom (vise je manje!) ostvari zavidan sadrzinski i estetski potencijal dela...
Sava.Stepanov,.1998
...ozbiljan, izgradjen, iskusan umetnik. Njegove apstraktne slike-konstrukcije na prvi pogled izgledaju originalne i dobro utemeljene u modernu tradiciju.
Peter Schjeldahl, New York, 1987
...Vizuelni objekti, ili "objekti za videti" Miroslava Pavlovica, ostaju konsekventni i savrseni sa stanovista sagledavanja njihovih konstitutivnih principa, apsolutistickih i puristickih, objekti dislociraju a zatim rekonstituisu vizuelnu percepciju, na jedan pikturalan nacin, putem estetskog funkcionisanja vrednog po sebi. Vizuelno obrazovanje koje predlazem implicitno ostaje paradoksalno: dakle, slike cistog vidjenja pojavljuju se kao vizuelno-konkretni objekti, njihova namera je sto potpunije integrisanje u prirodu, tako postaju cisto intelektualna nastojanja, matrice pogleda koje ocekuju objekat. Sadrzaj, objekat, odredjenje, jesu jedan drugi problem, "post festum", onoga koji posmatra to vidjenje vidjenja. Njihova lepota, prociscena i distancirana, govori jednoj drugoj intuiciji...
Magda.Carneci,.1980 -- text in Romanian 
...Supremacija vizuelnog ishodi izuzetnom posledicom, anulira emotivno, lirske reakcije, precizira jednu zajednicku cinjenicu, bez alegorijskih aluzija; ne dozvoljava kolateralna objasnjenja vec afirmise iskljucivo supstancu i funkciju. Takoreci, rad se definise objektivno identican samom sebi, kao i nacin kako se ostvaruje pod rigoroznom tehnickom kontrolom. Rad ne nudi nista drugo do to sto jeste u konkretnom smislu, citacu nece izmaci nemogucnost da transformise analizu jedne slike u sliku koja govori ili sliku govora...
Raoul.Shorban,.1980
-- text in Romanian


Museum of Contemporary Arts/Salon - Belgrade, 2000

Jerko (Jesa) Denegri 1999.

Na jugoslovenskoj umetnickoj sceni devedesetih Miroslav Pavlovic pojavio se iznenada i sasvim formiran, bez ikakvih pocetni(cki)h oklevanja, ili je barem tako izgledalo zato jer se njegovo formiranje odvijalo i do tada obavilo izvan domace sredine (u Rumuniji, gde je u Bukurestu redovne studije zavrsio tokom 1974-78, postdiplomske izmedju 1978-80), a potom se iskusao i postepeno izgradjivao boraveci, radeci i izlazuci na vise grupnih nastupa u skandinavskim zemljama i u Sjedinjenim Drzavama. Sa takvom, dakle, licnom predistorijom Pavlovic se prvi put samostalno pojavio u vrsackoj Konkordiji 1997, potom u novosadskom Zlatnom oku i beogradskom Centru za kulturnu dekontaminaciju 1998. ukljucujuci se odmah u kontekst vrlo indikativnih previranja na domacoj umetnickoj sceni kraja devedesetih, ujedno i samog kraja veka, u okolnostima ponovnih preispitivanja nekih temeljnih tekovina modernistickog umetnickog nasledja, no sada ne vise iz dekonstruktivistickih i simulacionistickih motivacija postmoderne nego, naprotiv, iz neokonstruktivistickih i iznova uspostavljenih formalistickih premisa jedne nove, ili druge moderne koja se kao karakteristicno stanje duha svakako sa jakim razlozima javila upravo u ovo krizno i katastroficno vreme poslednje decenije.
Likovna kultura na kojoj je Pavlovic formiran jeste kultura evropskog istorijskog i posleratnog konstruktivizma i konkretizma za koju je, tu kulturu, svojstveno da se umetnicko delo shvata i izgradjuje kao apsolutno autonomni artefakt, dakle kao delo liseno svake reference na predmetni svet izvan samog dela. A u zamenu za izostalu predstavu, iluziju ili aluziju okolnog predmetnog sveta, samo delo je predmet za sebe, predmet kao takav, predmet estetski, umetnicki, konkretan, kao sto je konkretan svaki drugi materijalni predmet u nasem svakodnevnom zivotnom okruzenju. Umetnik koji je tvorac takvog predmeta graditelj je novonastale plasticke strukture kao simbolicke tvorevine koja u duhovnom mikroprostoru dela upucuje na ponasanje kakvo bi umetnik kao projektant takvog dela zeleo da zagovara delujuci - u skladu sa generalnom ideologijom tradicije konstruktivizma - kao konstruktivna jedinka u fizickom makroprostoru sveta.
No, to su, zapravo, samo opsta mesta i temeljne postavke ideologije i oblikovnog jezika istorijskog i novog konstruktivizma, za svakog autora koji u prihvatanju te ideologije i jezika danas deluje postavlja se zahtev za izgradjivanjem pojedinacnog autorskog profila i njegovog specificnog doprinosa. M. Pavlovic je svoje pojedinacne osobine poceo da trazi i nalazi u podrucju postepenog prelaska od apstraktne slike kao monohromne plohe, kao oslikane dvodimenzionalne povrsine ka slici-objektu koja zadrzavajuci jednobojnu podlogu poseduje jos i svojstva materijalne konstrukcije. A to je obavio tako sto se od plohe kao potpune ravnine uputio u prostor pred tom ravninom aplicirajuci nad plohu trodimenzionalne elemente zahvaljujuci kojima je delo od slike preraslo u reljef, pri cemu je svojstvo reljefnosti osim prisustvom samih taktilnih elemenata pojacano jos i efektom senke koju ti elementi pod dejstvom svetlosti bacaju na podlogu nad kojom su ucvrsceni. U sledecem zahvatu, telesnost slika-objekata postignuta je tako sto je ram (okvir) prestao da bude neutralni pomocni faktor materijalnog sklopa dela i postao je njegov osnovni konstitutivni element. Naime, ram je postao materijalna granica slikanog polja koje jednom ostaje oslikano belim, ili drugi put, ujednacno obojenim crnim, zutim, oker ili plavim, pri cemu na takvoj osnovi likovni element kao sto je linija umesto da je slikan odnosno crtan sada je materijalizovan u vidu celicne sajle ili aluminijumske sipke. a posledica svih tih zahvata jeste da slika definitivno prestaje da bude ravna ploha poput ekrana koji emituje predstavu ili na kome se projektuje forma, nego postaje telo odredjene debljine i zapremine; u takvoj slici prostor poseduje ne vise potencijalnu nego stvarnu dubinu, a na galerijskom zidu postavlja se tako da bude centar ili integralni deo vidnog polja kojega osim obojenosti slike cini i belina okolnog zida.
Iz tradicije neoplasticizma M. Pavlovic izvodi princip horizontalno-vertikalnog polozaja elemenata kompozicije, iz istog istorijskog izvora koristi i sklop osnovnih boja (crveno, plavo, zuto, takodje jos crno i belo), ali ujedno tezi i narusavanju obaveza normativnog pridrzavanja ovih vec kodifikovanih tekovina postavljajuci objekt kvadratnog formata pod dijagonalnim otklonom, a zbog tog nagiba kojim se svesno narusava statika idealne ravnoteze delo poprima aktivniji decentrirani prostorni raspored. Dok se u pojedinacnim objektima pridrzava principa kompozicije, u radovima od secene hartije standardnih malih formata umetnik se pridrzava principa serije, variranja bliskih ali ne i ponavljanja potpuno identicnih formalnih jedinica, sto upucuje na to da je ovde posredi analiticki nacin misljenja, jedna vrsta gotovo naucnicki preciznog ispitivanja i proveravanja brojnih modaliteta koji svi proizlaze iz prividno suzenih ali u postupku detaljnije razrade gotovo neiscrpnih, uvek srodnih a ipak medjusobno dovoljno razlicitih optickih i vizuelnih resenja.
U nastojanju da napravi sledeci i ovoga puta zaista radikalni korak ka elaboraciji problema trodimenzionalne slike, na jednoj grupnoj izlozbi u vrsackoj Konkordiji krajem 1999, M. Pavlovic od zidnog objekta prelazi na zidnu instalaciju nazvanu Evolucija slike I, duzine skoro punih deset metara, visine tri metra, zahvaljujuci drvenoj konstrukciji na kojoj je platno nategnuto udaljenu od zidne plohe skoro do punog metra u sredistu takve, uslovno receno "slike", a zapravo jednog neobicnog oblika napravljanog od dva podjednaka komada impregniranog platna tamnosmedje boje. Platna ostavljenog takvim kakvo jeste, dakle platna neoslikanog nego koristenog jedino u funkciji materijala kao takvog, fabrickog, industrijskog, poput neke vrste ready-madea ovo jedinstveno delo gigantskog formata tvorevina je koja objedinjuje konstrukciju konkretnog oblika sa upotrebom konkretnog materijala, ovo delo dakle pomiruje status novonastalog objekta u tradiciji konstruktivizma i status zatecenog predmeta u tradicija ready-madea, a obe ove operacije zajedno uklapaju se u umetnikovu stalnu preokupaciju da izradi i uradi delo koje se, kao u ovom slucaju, mocno namece u prostoru svojom izrazitom fizickom prisutnoscu, a ipak je pri tome posredi pre svega delo ciste plasticke imaginacije i invencije, ujedno i delo cistog duhovnog sadrzaja i znacenja.
Sve Pavloviceve radove nezavisno od pojavnih razlika objedinjuje, zapravo, jedan temeljni princip: prioritet forme, misljenje formom, misljenje cisto likovno, plasticko, opticko, vizuelno, umesto da bude slikovno, narativno, alegorijsko, literarno. Ali to bespogovorno poverenje u formu niposto nije, naravno, "formalizam" (termin sa negativnom konotacijom), nego je to poverenje u stvari uzdizanje ideala forme na mesto vrhunskog simbolickog znaka sopstvenog dela. A taj znak oznacava pre svega spoznaju da je forma nezamenjivo svojstvo umetnickog rada, forma je tvorevina duha ali i tvorevina operativnog postupka, konstrukt uma i produkt ruke, jedinstvena i usaglasena posledica plasticke misli i oblikovne prakse. U poslednjoj deceniji veka umetnost je poprimila najraznolikije vidove ispoljavanja, posredi je razdoblje kada je u umetnosti fakticki sve moguce i sve je dozvoljeno, ali bas zbog te njene potpune oslobodjenosti savremenom umetniku danas je mozda teze nego ikada da bude strog prema samom sebi i prema sopstvenom umetnickom radu. Evo, medjutim, jednog umetnika koji se spremno pridrzava te samodiscipline, a to cini zato jer veruje da mu je umetnost - i to umetnost lisena svega izvanumetnickog - sasvim dovoljna licno da se izrazi, da opstane kao jedinka sama u svome svetu sopstvenih mogucnosti. Nekada, u istorijsko vreme modernih geometrija i geometrizama umetnost zasnovana na takvim principima idealisticki je verovala u kolektivna iskupljenja, danas pak u ovo postistorijsko vreme postmodernih i neomodernih geometrija i geometrizama umetnost zasnovana na takvim principima ne vise idealisticki, nego defetisticki veruje jedino u umetnikovu usamljenicku pojedinacnost iz koje ipak i uprkos svemu, kao sto pokazuje i primer ovog umetnika, mogu da nastanu i zaista nastaju cista i mocna umetnicka dela.


Museum of Contemporary Arts/Salon - Belgrade, 2000

Text by Jerko Denegri, 1999
Professor of Contemporary Arts Theory at the University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia

At Yugoslav art-scene of nineties Miroslav Pavlovic came up suddenly as a completely formed artist, without any hesitations specific to the begin(ers)ings, or at least seemed so because his formation was developing and up to that time developed outside of our country (in Romania, where in Bucharest he has finished studies during 1974-78, post university studies 1978-80), and after that gaining experience and gradually building out, residing, working and exhibiting at many collective exhibitions in Scandinavia and United States. With such, so to say, personal prehistory, Pavlovic has for the first time individually appeared in Concordia (Vrsac) 1997, after that in Golden Eye of Novi Sad and Center for Cultural Decontamination in Belgrade 1998. Instantly entering in the context of the very indicative turbulences on the domestic art scene at the end of nineties, which means also end of the century, under the circumstances of the new reexamination of some ground achievements of modernistic art heritage, but not any more from the constructivistic and simulationistic motivation of Postmodern but to the contrary from neoconstructivistic and again reestablished formalistic premises of new or second Modern which as a characteristic condition of the spirit with strong reasons appeared just now at the time of crises and catastrophe of the last decade.
Plastic culture at which M. Pavlovic is formed is a culture of European historic and after war Constructivism and Concretism, for witch that culture is specific, that sort of artwork is to comprehend and build out like absolutely autonomous artifact, artwork free of any reference to the external world. At the exchange for missing scene, illusion or allusion to surrounding material world; artwork is object to itself, object as it is, aesthetic object, artistic, concrete just the way it is any other material object in our everyday living suroundment. Artist who is the creator of such object is a builder of newly - made plastic structure; as an symbolic product, in a spiritual micro space of the work is guiding us at behavior which artist should take as an architect of such work wishing to speak in favor and act in accordance with general ideology of constructivist tradition as a constructive specie in a physical macro space of the world.
In fact, these are just general notions and fundamental aspects of ideology and formative language of historical and new Constructivism, for any author who is practicing today, by acceptance of such ideology and language; it imposes claim of building out individualistic personal profile of its specific contributions. Miroslav Pavlovic begin to search and found his personal characteristics in the field of gradual transition from the abstract painting as a monochrome plate; painted two - dimensional surface, to painting-objects holding up uni-coloristic background containing also characteristics of material construction. Work has been realized by departing from the plate, rising up to the space in front of surface; applicating above the plate three - dimensional elements by which the artwork from the painting has developed to a relief, the quality of relief is consisting of tactile elements emphasized by effect of the shadow, as a result of light influence over the surface above which material elements are fixed. The next achievement, corporeality of the painting-object is realized when the frame (holding construction) ended to be neutral assisting factor of material body of the work and became its basic constitutive element. Namely, the frame became material boundary of the painted field which once remains painted white, or other times, evenly painted black, yellow, ochre, or blue, by which at such background plastic element instead of being painted or drawn now is materialized in mode of steel wire or aluminum bars. The effect of all these conduct is that painting definitely ended to be a flat plate such as a screen emitting scene or projected form, but becomes body with certain thickness and volume, in such painting, space is no more potential but real with all possible correlatives of deepness; at a gallery wall work is placed to be center or integral part of the viewer's site; what beside of painted work includes whiteness of the wall, altogether.
From tradition of neoplasticism Pavlovic discerns principle of horizontal-vertical of the composed elements, from the same historic source using primer complex of the colors (red, blue, yellow and also black and white), but at the same time is tending to escape the obligations of normative approchement of these codified achievements by placing object of square form to diagonally vertical position, because of this inclination and consciously disturbed static of ideal equilibrium, work became more active at decentralized space arrangement. As long in the individual objects he is holding with principal of composition, in the works of cut paper of the standard small formats is following the principal of series, variation of close but never repeating of the same identical formal units; what is guiding us, to have it qualified as analytic way of thinking, sort of almost scientifically precise way of examination and re - examination of numerous modalities which are passing from apparently narrow, but in the process of detailed elaboration almost inexhaustible, always related but in between evidently different optical and visual outcomes.
Tending to accomplish next, and this time really radical step towards elaboration of the problem of three - dimensional painting, at a recent collective exhibition in Concordia (Vrsac) by the end of 1999, M. Pavlovic from the wall - object deed pass over to wall - installation called Evolution of the Painting no. I, work is long almost ten meters, high three meters, due to wooden construction on which canvas is tightened departed from the wall nearly one meter at the center, conditionally declared "painting", but actually it is an unusual shape made of two equal pieces of waterproof material (textile) of brown - dark color. Canvas stands the way it is, so to say, unpainted canvas used only in a material function of what it is; of the factory made, industrial, somehow it is a kind of ready - made. This unique artwork of gigantic size is creation that unifies construction of concrete form by using concrete material; actually this artwork is reconciliation status of newly - made object of constructivist tradition with status of the found object in ready - made tradition, both of these operations together are making impact of artist's permanent engagement to build out (realize, make) artwork, which is like this time mighty imposing in space by its exceptional physical presence, after all it is art product of purely plastic imagination and invention, at the same time it is artwork of pure spiritual consistence and meaning.
All works of Miroslav Pavlovic no matter of their appearing difference are unified by one basic principal: priority of the form, thinking by the form, purely plastic thinking, optic, visual, instead of being painted, narrative, allegoric, literary. This undoubted trust to the form is not just "formalism" (term with negative connotation), in fact this is a trust, to lifting ideal of the form at a position of exclusive symbolic sign of individualistic work of art. That sign represents before all, knowlidgement that the form is irreplaceable quality of the artwork, form is a creation of the spirit, but also the result of operative process, construct of mind and product of the hand, unique, and accordingly result of plastic thinking, and formative praxis. At the last decade of the century, art has gained most different forms of expression, it is a question of time where in art all is possible and permitted, but, probably because of such liberation to contemporary artist today is more difficult than ever before to be rigorous to himself, and toward to his artistic activity. So, here it is, an artist who is strictly holding with such self - discipline, he does that because of believe that art to him is-and that disposes art of all that is not art itself - sufficiently enough to express himself, to survive individually (lonely) in the world of very personal possibilities. Once upon a time in a historical period of Modern Geometry and geometrisams art based at such principals idealistically has believed in collective redemption, but today in this post historical time of Postmodern and Neo-modern geometry and geometrisams art based at such (grounds) principals is not any more idealistic, but defeatisticly believes only in artist's solitudes individuality from which in spite of all, like example of this artist shows, it is possible to make, and so, indeed are created pure and mighty works of art.


Museum of Contemporary Arts/Salon - Belgrade, 2000

von Jovan Despotovic 1997
Kustos im Museum der modernen Kunst in Belgrad, Jugoslawien

Das Bild als Kunstgegenstand hat während des Modernismus im 20. Jahrhundert zahlreiche Transformationen erfahren. Diese Veränderungen gingen meistens in Richtung seiner Selbstüberprüfung, Problematisierung eines jeden seiner traditionellen Elemente und formalen Postulate, seiner visuellen Charakteristiken, seines poetischen oder semantischen Inhalts usw.
In der Zeit der historischen Avantgarden am Anfang dieses Jahrhunderts wurde das Bild zuerst in seinem Status angeschnitten durch die Reduktion des komplexen bildlichen Inhalts, der im Laufe seiner langen Geschichte gebildet wurde, als es trotzdem seine wenigstens veränderte Gestalt eines Kunstgegenstandes behalten hat, während es in radikalsten Fällen durch andere Nicht-Kunstgegenstände substituiert wurde, die Autoren mit dem Verkündigungsakt in das ästhetische Feld eingeführt haben.
Dieser Prozess wurde in der Zeit der konzeptuellen Kunst in den siebziger Jahren noch einmal wiederholt mit beiden seiner geschichtlichen Ausgänge. Das Bild wurde nach seinem Selbstmord im Enformel auf seine konstitutiven, primären Inhalte zurückgeführt, während diese Inhalte in einem anderen Kapitel dieser neuen Kunstpraxis analytisch problematisiert wurden von der epistemologischen, ontologischen und axiologischen Seite - im extremsten Falle wird der Kunstgegenstand selbst endlich entmaterialisiert, alle gewöhnlichen ästhetischen Inhalte sind also darin eingebaut, nur daß er nicht finalisiert wurde zu seinem materiellen Zustand.
Einen Teil dieser ästhetischen Aktivitäten des Modernismus könnte man als ein bestimmtes Experiment mit der Bildkonstruktion betrachten. Dieser Prozess wurde in der Epoche des Kubismus initiert und hat sich dann doch an der Oberfläche der Leinwand abgespielt. Der Konstruktivismus im russischen künstlerischen Experiment hat die klassische Vorstellung vom Bild desturiert, indem er es in das Feld des Reliefs bzw. des Objekts einführte, das die Eigenschaften des Bildes und der Skulptur kombiniert: das Bild blieb hier als Echo der Bildlichkeit und die Skulptur erscheint gleichzeitig mit ihrem Volumen, der dritten Dimension, dem Bedürfnis nach Verräumung.
Die Künstler mit aktuellen Ansichten der heutigen Praxis finalisieren diese Prozesse, kombinieren sie, verschränken sie, recyclen sie mit der klaren Absicht, den Status des neuen künstlerischen Schaffens nochmals zu (re)definieren. Ein der Öffentlichkeit völlig unbekannter Maler aus Vrsac, Miroslav Pavlovic, kommt in die Reihe der Autoren, die sich auf eine offensichtlich Problem-Weise gegenüber dem Komplex der ästhetischen Fragen, mit denen sich das laufende Schaffen beschäftigt, gestellt haben. Pavlovic wurde 1952 in Vrsac geboren, studierte an der Kunstakademie in Bukarest und machte 1978 auch sein Magisterstudium dort. Bisher hatte er Ausstellungen in Rumänien, Jugoslawien, skandinavischen Ländern und in den USA. An der Ausstellung in Vrsacer Konkordija zeigte er über 60 Bilder-Objekte und die gleiche Anzahl von Arbeiten auf dem Papier, die im Laufe von 15 Jahren entstanden sind.
Der Raum dieser Galerie selbst ermöglichte es Pavlovic, seine Ausstellung in einige Zyklen aufzuteilen, so wie sie nach einer offensichtlich einzigartigen inneren kreativen Idee entstanden. Man kann sagen, daß Pavlovic praktisch zum denselben Ziel gekommen ist, indem er verschiedene Malverfahren benutzt hat. Eines von ihnen basiert auf der analytischen und primären monochromen Malerei, wenn ihre Basiselemente - Farbe, die piktorelle Schicht überhaupt, das Prozess des Malens - diskutiert werden, die Art des Anstreichens der koloristischen Materie auf den Grund des Bildes und zugleich wird die Leinwandoberfläche im Bild - sein Aussehen, das Vorbereitungsverfahren, die Textur, technische Charakteristiken in diesem Prozess zum legitimen und konstitutiven Arbeitselement promoviert. Das andere Verfahren ist die Strukturierung der Gestalt des Bildes überhaupt, früher sagte man - die Poetik, auf die geometrischen Postulate, und im Laufe der achtziger Jahre handelt es sich eigentlich um eine Art Simulation der plastischen Sprache in den neugeometrischen Syntaxen des späten Modernismus. Das dritte ist der dekonstruktivistische Faktor in den Werken rezenter Produktion, wenn irgendeiner oder alle Inhalte der Malerei zerlegt werden in voneinander unabhängige ästhetische Komplexe, die in einem solchen "fraktalen" Zustand immerhin eine einheitliche Bildvorstellung bilden.
Es ist keineswegs möglich, das Opus von Miroslav Pavlovic in bezug auf seine große Ausstellungsabstinenz als reines Anfängerexperiment mit ungewissem Ausgang zu betrachten. Pavlovic hat überzeugend, verständlich und begründet ein völlig definiertes Malkonzept gezeigt, das völlig in der Ästhetik dieser Zeit fundiert ist, die auf den letzten Spuren des späten Modernismus steht, oder sogar in jenem Komplex der künstlerischen Fragen, die heute theoretisch auf die Idee einer neuen oder einer anderen Moderne am Ende des Jahrhunderts und dieser großen Kunstepoche gerichtet sind. Wie auch immer die endgültige Antwort auf die Frage über die Ziele und Bedeutung der Arbeiten von Miroslav Pavlovic sein mag, wird sein Werk ohne Zweifel in den Inhalt jenes laufenden Schaffens eingehen, das ihre künstlerischen Grenzen wahrhaftig verschoben hat.

By Stevan Vukovic 2004

The Dimension of Optical and Contextual Displacement

 

Reading the visual language of Miroslav Pavlovic's D-works, an impression might be that they are made in a purely for­malist manner, focused on the precise, intuitively calculated arrangement of visual forms and shapes as their essential problem. Their quite manifest abstract and minimalist features, which one can refer back to practices of constructivism and concretism, as well as to the experiences of primary and analytic painting, indicate a strategy of avoiding represen­tation, as if stating that the visual forms which they consist of are fully 'independent', not representing any other reality but of their own presentness.

But, in fact, a work is always an indexical sign denominating where a particular artist is at a specific point on the timeline of development of his practices in art in sets of local and global contexts, and it inevitably refers to decisions and ac­tions that affect choices, perceptions, ways of working and positioning of that artist in the art world of the times. There­fore, even this abstract/formalist work has be interpreted as a collection of signs in a system of representation which discoursively relates itself to the specific paradigms of art that are recognized by a society and treated as normative for a certain cultural milieu.

On one hand, these D-works by Pavlovic, in their representational inclination, existing despite of wide spreaded theses on the amnesia of modernist abstraction, do relate to the history of disputes on the plastic and constructive position of form in abstract painting, in an act of countering the Greenbergian myth on painting's endgame and essential identity in the two-dimensional surface. By introducing a spatial vector, these works displace the viewer from the luxury position of the bearer of the gaze that fully apprehends the image from a fixed position. They fuse form and space, cutting down the illusion of optical eye.

On the other hand, in the framework of visual art as a knowledge production system, that is based on constant experiental encounters with the new and non-standardized types of relations to the established retinal regimes, this work insists on the production of such an experience that would be generated through constantly moving away from the expected simultaneity of a painting, from pure optical pattern, to a subtle game of spatial repetition and recombination, reflection and opacity. It tends to merge the poetic and visceral nature of the aesthetic experience with the logic of the controlled process of spatial construction.

 

Top.of.page


Center for Cultural Exchange with Foreign Countries

Bucharest, Romania - 1980

 

Text by Raoul Shorban / June 1980, Bucharest - Romania
Raoul Shorban, Profesor of Art History at the Institute of Fine Art "Nicolae Grigorescu", Bucharest, Romania,1980.

Miroslav Pavlovic persists eagerly to reject all he knows about painting: all the manners meant to give evidence to a trained convention repertory. So, he rejects a past, looking for the standing point of the present. The proceeding starts from the intellectual style - tending to speculation and concentration of an artist resistant against those temptations which comfortably rely on the general or particular evidences of harmonious "cohabitation" offered by the nature. It is clear that M. Pavlovic is irritated at an immense world experience, often converted into an industry producing merchandise, manufactured in order to take sundry advantage.
M. Pavlovic rejects also by the dialectical necessity of the points of view's reexamination, looking for himself, he contests the dominating spirit of some creations, tendencies, styles, as well as the influence of some despotic personalities, unable to give up the obsessions of their subjectivity.
And so, here it is, a choice. An unengaged choice, in the old meaning of painting, a choice which refuses the logic of the representation of the external appearances, of their connections between themselves - and avoids to join what the young painter is now knowing, by assimilation or accumulation, about his work generally, to what he puts in opposition to the tradition and inherited common understanding. As examples of assimilation we could see, now, in this exhibition, the painter's studies, and at the year's painting and sculpture exhibition, in Bucharest, at the Dalles-Hall - 1980, a "Still Life". From the chaos of the possibilities, Pavlovic persists to discern the project of a new accomplishment - anti-traditional. That is why, deliberately, he doesn't resume objective or subjective properties, dependent to any legislated judgments, he is not doing allusions to forms and colors, able to offer analogies or associations, he doesn't intent to do any metaphor, memories, neither to the emotions or routine ideas, nor to the "cliché", or to the immersions due to some former art creations. Against these manners of perceptions, M. Pavlovic accepts a single way to take possession of the picture itself, purged of symbols and affective connections with the nature, as a vigorous optical structure.
The supremacy of the emotional and lyrical reactions specified as a clear fact, without allusions to the allegories; - it cannot permit collateral explanations and it emphasizes exclusively it's substance and it's destination. Therefore, the painting is clearly defined to be objectively identical to itself and with the way in which it is technically made under a rigorous and organized control. It is (the image) nothing else but what it is, or concretely must be - an image by itself!
Maybe the entire conduct which we are referring to could appear too theoretic and cheating, if we shouldn't know that, there is something in the world, which is not identical with the human being, and which has nothing in common with him, and which cannot "emit signs". The human being is looking at that world without receiving any answer; he can see and understand things and he tries to change the metaphysical agreement, contracted long ago in his name and he finds that something - essential and decisive - is going to change in the contemporary relation between him and the universe. Leaving out the question: "Why right now and in which way?" we could mention that the new elements appeared in the existence, have already overthrown some of old or new legends. Concerning the painting, these phenomena are obliging us to leave - with or without regrets - the impressionism, expressionism, surrealism, abstractionism etc., which after all, have lost their persuasion strength. Miroslav Pavlovic is attempting such a divorce hoping to realize it.

 

Center for Cultural Exchange with Foreign Countries

 Bucharest, Romania - 1980

 

Text by Magda Carneci, June 1980, Bucharest, Romania
Magda Carneci, Curator at the National Museum, Bucharest, Romania, 1980.

If any creative attempt would have to offer an unedited experience or again to reedit the eternal one; plastic objects of Miroslav Pavlovic are editing on its own account an not-edited experience of a modern painting, which otherwise has become obsessive and symptomatic: visualization of the sight. Measure by which any kind of visual art considers, necessarily, partly illusion, and partly allusion, what follows painting of M. Pavlovic is reduction to transpassing in objectualisation of illusion and allusion of pictorial act: more precisely, replacement of old illusionary vectors by new ones.
His works are not visualizing anymore objects of the sight, but sight itself, plasticizing their inner mechanism: specialization with correlatives of the three-dimensionality "not masked" in the objects, but in their "pure" condition of the vectors, relations, visually clear, transferred directly in three-dimensionality and real spatiality of his work, with multiplexity of the strata, deliberately realized in mathematical relation of dimensions and chromatic absolutism of primary and complementary relations. Instead of classical object of trompe l'oeil here appears the trompe l'oeil itself, dismembered - "unmasked" - and reduced to a tiny number of its functional principles: from the illusion of the second degree, to say, to illusion of the first degree, or to elimination of visual illusion, maybe, more illusory than any other illusion.
Tautological process, so to say, visualization of the sight is guiding us at the same direction like thinking: examination of perceptive condition and not content of the same. And there it is, an experience of the conscience equally valid, if intellectual, with any other kind of rationality.
Paradoxically, the appearing experience with visible results, this much "abstract", is inspired by reduction to the final aspiration for concrete: with more direct approach, set free of natural intermediation, meaning, place and goal of interest, not through intermedia of the environment, but through direct reproduction of natural mechanism of the same nature. Conscientization of the part of illusion is inseparable from any plastic attempt, act of watching, the way eye would have been able to see itself or its inner functioning, dislocated from itself, conscientization becomes the way of "englobing" to what is real.
The real gain to "mind, body and heart" of such an attempt from time to time called "clear visuality", or in a way of Mondrian - visual civilization of "pure relations", it remains problem of choice: conscientization of the sight is taking us to a better, more complete and truthful comprehension of the world, or - paraphrasing Oscar Wild - to see the nature in the system of "clear visuality": what we ought to see "has been seen already", or disappears.
Visual objects or "objects to see" of Miroslav Pavlovic are remaining consecutive and perfect concerning their constitutive principals, absolutistic and puristic; these objects are dislocating and thereafter, reconstituting visual perception, in a pictorial way, using aesthetic functioning valid to itself. Visual education that I propose implicitly remains paradoxical: and so; purified pictures of the sight appear like visually-concrete objects, their intention is much better integration in the nature, pictures become purely intellectual endeavors, matrix of the sight which are expecting the object. Content, object's determinations are another problem, "post festum" of the one that is watching the sight of the sight. Their purified and distant beauty is speaking to another, different intuition.

 

Magda Krnetch, (Magda Carneci) ,
Conservateur du Musée National, Bucarest, Romania, 1980.

Si chaque essai artistique devrait offrir une dextérité non éditée ou de nouveau une infini, les objets exprimés par la peinture de Miroslav Pavlovitch de nouveau présentent pour leur propre compte une expérience non éditée de la peinture moderne, qui devient déja une actualisation visuelle obsessive et symptomatique. La mesure par laquelle n'importe quelle n'importe quelle sorte de la peinture comprend, indispensablement, en partie l'illusion et en partie l'allusion, ce que suit le tableau de Miroslav Pavlovitch est la réduction jusqu'au passage en objectivation de l'illusion et de l'allusion de l'acte pictural: dit plus précisément, remplacement des vecteurs anciens d'illusion par de nouveaux vecteurs.
Ses travaux ne pendent plus visuels les objets qu'on regarde, mais une vision pour soi, les mécanismes en les plastifiant les memes: l'espace avec des corrélats de la profondeur et des trois dimensions mais non mis en construction, " masques " dans les objets, mais dans leur état propre, des vecteurs et des rapports visuellement propres en ce qui concerne leur état, transferes concretement dans la troisieme dimension et l'espace propre de ses travaux, avec des plans a plusieurs couches réalises d'une manière tres astucieuse dans des rapports mathématiques des dimensions et dans l'absolutisme des rapports chromatiques primaires et complémentaires. A la place de l'objet classique trompe l'oeil ici apparaît trompe l'oeil pour soi, démontes-" démasques " -et réduit a un petit nombre de ses principes de fonctionnement, de l'illusion du deuxieme degré, comme on dirait, a l'illusion du premier degré, mais a la communication de l'illusion visuelle, peut-etre plus illusion rament plus que n'importe quelle autre illusion.
L'essai tautologique, on pourrait le dire, de la visualisation du regard est orientée, comme acte de méditation:une recherche de l'état de la perception et non du contenu du meme et voila une expérience de la conscience et de meme valeur, cependant intellectuelle, avec n'importe quel autre mode de penser. Paradoxalement, cette expérience de l'aperçu avec des résultats visibles tellement "abstraits", est motivée par mise en mesure a l'intention finale vers le concret: par une approche plus directe, sans intermédiaires de la nature comme lieu et but du regard, pas par l'intermède d'un coin, d'un coin de la nature, mais par une reproduction indirecte des mécanismes naturels de la perception de la même nature. La prise en conscie ce d'une partie de l'illusion est une partie inséparable de n'importe quel de l'arte facte, de l'acte de regarder, comme l'oeil pourrait se voir lui-même ou bien voir son fonctionnement intérieur, déplace derriere lui, la prise en conscience devient la voie pour l'introduction au réel.
La réception réelle pour la "raison, le corps et le coeur" d'un tel essai, nomme parfois " visuellaité propre " ou-le mode de Mondrian - civilisation visuelle" des rapports propres ", reste une probleme de choix: la prise ne conscience mené vers un monde meilleur, plus complet et plus vrai, ou mené - en paraphrasant Oscar Wilde - vers le mode de regarder la nature dans le systeme" de la vision pure'': ce qui est nécessaire de voir, "déja vu" ou disparaît.
Les objets visuels, ou " les objets a voir" de Miroslav Pavlovitch, restent conséquents et parfaits du point de vue de l'examen de leurs principes constitutifs, absolutistes et puristes, les objets disloquent et ensuite reconstruisent la perception visuelle, dans un mode pictural, par le fonctionnement esthétique valeureux par soi. L'éducation visuelle que je propose implicitement reste paradoxale : donc, des tableaux de la vision pure apparaissant comme des objet visuels - concrets, leur but est une intégration plus complète dans la nature ; comme cela ils deviennent une intention tout a fait intellectuelle, du modele du qui attend l'objet. Le contenu, l'objet, la détermination, sont un autre probleme, da celui qui regarde ce déja vu. Leur beauté, purifiée est distancée, parle a une autre intuition.

Top.of.page

HOME | WORKS | TEXT